Measurement of polypectomy rate by using administrative claims data with validation against the adenoma detection rate

Neal C. Patel, Rafiul S. Islam, Qing Wu, Suryakanth R. Gurudu, Francisco C Ramirez, Michael D. Crowell, Douglas Orrick Faigel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a main quality indicator in colonoscopy but has many challenges for calculating. The polypectomy rate (PR) may be calculable from administrative claims data, but this has not been validated against the ADR. Objective: To determine whether a PR calculated from United States billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for the ADR. Design: A PR was calculated by using billing claims data from Current Procedural Terminology codes. The ADR was calculated for each endoscopist by using an endoscopy report database to which the pathology report data had been added. The relationship between PR and ADR was evaluated with the Pearson correlation coefficient. The ADR was plotted against the PR by individual endoscopist, and a least-squares regression line was created. A t test was used to analyze the differences in lesion detection between endoscopists with a PR above and below the benchmark PR. Setting: Tertiary-care, outpatient endoscopy center. Patients: All ages undergoing colonoscopy. Main Outcome Measurements: PR and ADR. Results: A total of 5382 colonoscopies were reviewed. A significant relationship between endoscopists' calculated PRs and ADRs was seen (r = 0.85; P <.001). Endoscopists needed a PR of 35% to achieve the recommended benchmark ADR of 20%. Endoscopists with PRs of 35% or greater had an ADR of 27% (6.2 standard deviation [SD]) as compared with 19% (1.9 SD) for those with PRs less than 35% (P =.0029). Limitations: Study population. Conclusion: Calculated PR from billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for ADR and may become an important quality measure for external and internal use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)390-394
Number of pages5
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume77
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2013

Fingerprint

Adenoma
Colonoscopy
Benchmarking
Endoscopy
Current Procedural Terminology
Tertiary Healthcare
Least-Squares Analysis
Outpatients
Databases
Pathology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Measurement of polypectomy rate by using administrative claims data with validation against the adenoma detection rate. / Patel, Neal C.; Islam, Rafiul S.; Wu, Qing; Gurudu, Suryakanth R.; Ramirez, Francisco C; Crowell, Michael D.; Faigel, Douglas Orrick.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 77, No. 3, 03.2013, p. 390-394.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Patel, Neal C. ; Islam, Rafiul S. ; Wu, Qing ; Gurudu, Suryakanth R. ; Ramirez, Francisco C ; Crowell, Michael D. ; Faigel, Douglas Orrick. / Measurement of polypectomy rate by using administrative claims data with validation against the adenoma detection rate. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2013 ; Vol. 77, No. 3. pp. 390-394.
@article{f347ace7d9cc436680522ec8b9922e78,
title = "Measurement of polypectomy rate by using administrative claims data with validation against the adenoma detection rate",
abstract = "Background: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a main quality indicator in colonoscopy but has many challenges for calculating. The polypectomy rate (PR) may be calculable from administrative claims data, but this has not been validated against the ADR. Objective: To determine whether a PR calculated from United States billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for the ADR. Design: A PR was calculated by using billing claims data from Current Procedural Terminology codes. The ADR was calculated for each endoscopist by using an endoscopy report database to which the pathology report data had been added. The relationship between PR and ADR was evaluated with the Pearson correlation coefficient. The ADR was plotted against the PR by individual endoscopist, and a least-squares regression line was created. A t test was used to analyze the differences in lesion detection between endoscopists with a PR above and below the benchmark PR. Setting: Tertiary-care, outpatient endoscopy center. Patients: All ages undergoing colonoscopy. Main Outcome Measurements: PR and ADR. Results: A total of 5382 colonoscopies were reviewed. A significant relationship between endoscopists' calculated PRs and ADRs was seen (r = 0.85; P <.001). Endoscopists needed a PR of 35{\%} to achieve the recommended benchmark ADR of 20{\%}. Endoscopists with PRs of 35{\%} or greater had an ADR of 27{\%} (6.2 standard deviation [SD]) as compared with 19{\%} (1.9 SD) for those with PRs less than 35{\%} (P =.0029). Limitations: Study population. Conclusion: Calculated PR from billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for ADR and may become an important quality measure for external and internal use.",
author = "Patel, {Neal C.} and Islam, {Rafiul S.} and Qing Wu and Gurudu, {Suryakanth R.} and Ramirez, {Francisco C} and Crowell, {Michael D.} and Faigel, {Douglas Orrick}",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.032",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "77",
pages = "390--394",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measurement of polypectomy rate by using administrative claims data with validation against the adenoma detection rate

AU - Patel, Neal C.

AU - Islam, Rafiul S.

AU - Wu, Qing

AU - Gurudu, Suryakanth R.

AU - Ramirez, Francisco C

AU - Crowell, Michael D.

AU - Faigel, Douglas Orrick

PY - 2013/3

Y1 - 2013/3

N2 - Background: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a main quality indicator in colonoscopy but has many challenges for calculating. The polypectomy rate (PR) may be calculable from administrative claims data, but this has not been validated against the ADR. Objective: To determine whether a PR calculated from United States billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for the ADR. Design: A PR was calculated by using billing claims data from Current Procedural Terminology codes. The ADR was calculated for each endoscopist by using an endoscopy report database to which the pathology report data had been added. The relationship between PR and ADR was evaluated with the Pearson correlation coefficient. The ADR was plotted against the PR by individual endoscopist, and a least-squares regression line was created. A t test was used to analyze the differences in lesion detection between endoscopists with a PR above and below the benchmark PR. Setting: Tertiary-care, outpatient endoscopy center. Patients: All ages undergoing colonoscopy. Main Outcome Measurements: PR and ADR. Results: A total of 5382 colonoscopies were reviewed. A significant relationship between endoscopists' calculated PRs and ADRs was seen (r = 0.85; P <.001). Endoscopists needed a PR of 35% to achieve the recommended benchmark ADR of 20%. Endoscopists with PRs of 35% or greater had an ADR of 27% (6.2 standard deviation [SD]) as compared with 19% (1.9 SD) for those with PRs less than 35% (P =.0029). Limitations: Study population. Conclusion: Calculated PR from billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for ADR and may become an important quality measure for external and internal use.

AB - Background: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a main quality indicator in colonoscopy but has many challenges for calculating. The polypectomy rate (PR) may be calculable from administrative claims data, but this has not been validated against the ADR. Objective: To determine whether a PR calculated from United States billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for the ADR. Design: A PR was calculated by using billing claims data from Current Procedural Terminology codes. The ADR was calculated for each endoscopist by using an endoscopy report database to which the pathology report data had been added. The relationship between PR and ADR was evaluated with the Pearson correlation coefficient. The ADR was plotted against the PR by individual endoscopist, and a least-squares regression line was created. A t test was used to analyze the differences in lesion detection between endoscopists with a PR above and below the benchmark PR. Setting: Tertiary-care, outpatient endoscopy center. Patients: All ages undergoing colonoscopy. Main Outcome Measurements: PR and ADR. Results: A total of 5382 colonoscopies were reviewed. A significant relationship between endoscopists' calculated PRs and ADRs was seen (r = 0.85; P <.001). Endoscopists needed a PR of 35% to achieve the recommended benchmark ADR of 20%. Endoscopists with PRs of 35% or greater had an ADR of 27% (6.2 standard deviation [SD]) as compared with 19% (1.9 SD) for those with PRs less than 35% (P =.0029). Limitations: Study population. Conclusion: Calculated PR from billing claims data is an accurate surrogate for ADR and may become an important quality measure for external and internal use.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873704223&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873704223&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.032

DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2012.09.032

M3 - Article

C2 - 23199647

AN - SCOPUS:84873704223

VL - 77

SP - 390

EP - 394

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 3

ER -